Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (114442)	9/10/2003 5:09:17 PM
From: epicure	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You have no evidence to support your points. You have come up with "he might" and "what if he had" and "such and such wasn't accounted for, so he could....". The problem with your position is that Saddam didn't DO anything new. He was just sitting in Iraq being recalcitrant- not a sterling basis for starting a war. My position, on the other hand, is based on what was actually happening. I think when going to war the standards are high, and proof needs to be very strong. While Saddam was a VBL (very bad leader) we do not preemptively invade countries with VBL's. in fact, we often make friends with VBL's and sell them weapons- as we did previously with Saddam.